>> This is to substitute built-in r8169 driver if it doesn't work well. > > Please don't. If this gets added to Debian then every time there is a > bug in in-tree r8169 then users will be told 'oh, try r8168'. And if > the bug is not present in r8168 then they may not report the bug at all, > and it will take longer to fix.
Nobody argue that r8169 should be improved. You've made a good point that including r8168 might delay fixing r8169. On the other hand without alternative driver one might suspect faulty hardware, in which case time will be wasted and diagnosis will be delayed. When reporting bugs people should be able to compare and say "hey, this works and that doesn't". While fixing drivers is very important, as far as I understand, Debian role is to provide usable system to people. I'm surprised how easily you prepared to refuse the remedy in favour of (rather obscure) benefit to driver development. Having alternative driver breaks nothing and put nothing at risk. One of the things I like about Debian is that we have plenty of alternatives so for example nobody tell we should kick all web servers but Apache. Having another driver available for our users is not against our traditions. > The major reason for out-of-tree driver updates is to support new > hardware on older kernel versions, but we already do that through > backports. Right, but in this case we can't backport so at the moment for some unfortunate owners of Realtek cards alternative driver is the only option. Nobody likes it but is seems to be necessary. Eventually we can kick this driver out of debian according to popcon survey when it become clear it is no longer needed.. Regards, Dmitry. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANBdODUsfETzOZz=hM00E8+9CCrnwjE7-inX4rrWMRa2=qx...@mail.gmail.com
